Inside Factory China

blackbearnh writes "While China is attempting to pull its industry up out of mere manufacturing mode, for now the country is the production workhorse of the consumer electronics industry. Almost anything you pick up at a Best Buy first breathed life across the Pacific Ocean. But what is it like to shepherd a product through the design and production process? Andrew 'bunnie' Huang has done just that with the Chumby, a new Internet appliance. In an interview with O'Reilly Radar, he talks about the logistical and moral issues involved with manufacturing in China, as well as his take on the consumer's right to hack the hardware they purchase."

Comments

Chumby homepage stinks, article OK

[Bearhouse]

Link to Chumby page Flash-infested, but interview with creator quite refreshing, for example:

JT: There seems to be a running battle between the users of equipment and the manufacturers, be it jail-broken iPhones or hacked Xboxes. How much control do you think a manufacturer legitimately should be allowed to have over the use of their hardware?

AH: Well, I think that a manufacturer, basically once the hardware leaves the factory, and someone's paid whatever the market price is for it, then the user owns it, right? So I mean you could take that piece of hardware, melt it down and use it for the component metals if you want, use it for a doorstop. You could use it for something completely other than the computer, that you had not imagined it to be used for. So the hardware itself is pretty much -- I kind of believe you buy it, you own it.

Re:Chumby homepage stinks, article OK

[Bearhouse]

He has it wrong. Unlocked communication devices are different, because they can cause additional costs/damage on the network they are connected to. This is the reason smartphone makers cripple their devices.

If the cell phone network eventually becomes as robust *cough* as the Internet, then the need for unlocked devices will go away. But right now, there is a lot of "trust the client" built in to the way the cellular network operates.

Me confused. Depends what you're meaning by 'communication device' and 'unlocked', definitions of which seem to vary during your post.

IMHO existing GSM cell phone networks are *very* robust, (at least in Europe), and either nuke or tolerate 'unlocked' devices pretty well. Working upwards:

1. You/service provider can (optionally) link your account/SIM to the device IMEI. Service providers can block devices at IMEI level, regardless of the SIM inserted. They don't like what your device is doing? It dies. See:

http://www.babt.com/gsm-imei-number-allocation.asp

2. If you clone a sim card, the network will block the account linked to the SIM as soon as you fire up two simultaneously, or just fry the 'defective' first one.

3. Assuming you get your 'open' device working, then access to the network and its associated services is fairly tightly controlled, and is in any case linked to your ID and - more importantly - method of payment.

4. Most devices are 'sold' @ less than list/cost price as part of a package deal. It's understandable that you can then only use them on the SP's net - they're 'locked'. Of course, options exist to 'unlock' them for use on any network, but again, your priviledges on that network will depend on your SIM, not the device.

5. Finally, some devices - most notoriously the iPhone - are 'locked' as to what apps you can install on them. The ingenuous excuse offered by Apple is that 'this is to prevent damage to the device/network', which is, of course, complete bollocks. I own one of the most 'secure' GSMs around - a Blackberry - and it's quite happy to let me install 'unauthorised' apps...

Locked clients are all to do with business models, not (unfortunately) robustness.